Posted on 04/22/2005 9:35:16 AM PDT by metalmanx2j
Pope Benedict XVI has responded firmly to the first challenge of his papacy by condemning a Spanish government bill allowing marriage between homosexuals.
The bill, passed by parliament's Socialist-dominated lower house, also allows gay couples to adopt.
A senior Vatican official described the bill - which is likely to become law within a few months - as iniquitous.
He said Roman Catholic officials should be prepared to lose their jobs rather than co-operate with the law.
The bill would make Spain the first European country to allow homosexual people to marry and adopt children.
Belgium and the Netherlands only allow same-sex marriages. It is also a dramatic step in the rapid secularisation of what was once one of the most devoutly Roman Catholic countries in Europe.
The head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council on the Family, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, denounced the legislation as profoundly iniquitous.
Secular state
Interviewed in the Italian newspaper, Corriere de la Serra, Cardinal Lopez Trujillo said the Church was making an urgent call for freedom of conscience for Roman Catholics and appealing to them to resist the law.
He said every profession linked with implementing homosexual marriages should oppose it, even if it meant losing their jobs.
The cardinal insisted that just because something was made law it did not make it right.
Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero took office a year ago making it clear he intended to remove what he called the church's undeniable advantages and make Spain a secular state.
There are likely to be further tensions with Pope Benedict XVI. Mr Zapatero has made it clear that he intends to streamline divorce law and even to relax the conditions placed on abortion.
i share the sentiment of most on this board and am totally opposed to this, but i was at the bookstore the other day and notice soooo many books talking about gay marriage. The question is when have so many books been written about a subject and the law not been changed?
any examples?
Well, there may be a distinction here between the teachings of the Church and Holy Scripture. While there are a number of examples, I offer two:
“Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work” [Titus 3:1]
“Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's” [Matthew 22:21]
It is certainly up to the individual to determine when and how to resist wrong things. For example, I would agree that a Christian may choose to resign rather than issue marriage licenses to homosexuals. On the other hand, it would be inappropriate simply to refuse to issue them if their job requires them to.
For what it is worth, the sixth commandment is “Thou shalt not murder”; there are circumstances where killing is both legal and moral (war, self-defense, etc.)
The only place that I recall where the Bible offers explicit guidance to disobey civil authority is in the book of Revelation, where believers are instructed to refuse to take the mark of the anti-Christ, even to the point of death if necessary.
Church teachings should be Biblical; otherwise they constitute “interpretation” of Scripture, much as liberal judges “interpret” the Constitution to discover hidden separation of “Church and State” meaning.
Words mean what they say – or should.
It takes time to turn public opinion. The media is going to work overtime to indoctrinate our youth into either cowering away from confrontation over a belief against homosexuality, or empowering supporters to become more vocal and demanging. The young are the most impressionable. The more they become supportive of the gay lifestyle, the more they will be targeted with it as consumers in the marketplace. They spend their money and the marketplace wants it.
It's happening today. Look at the Molotov cocktails getting hurled at Pope Benedict before the smoke has even dissipated from the Sistine Chapel stovepipe. The Logo network, operated by MTV, will be a BASIC channel dedicated to gay and lesbian programming. The voters of tomorrow are going to be brainwashed until marriage becomes nothing but a "word".
It takes time. Watch. Better yet, don't watch. Turn off the television. It peddles Death, not Life...
I agree - like "eat my flesh, drink my blood".
Bravo! Long live Benedict XVI!
The Vicar of Christ?
Who the hell are they to tell him what to do?
An intrinsically evil law is no law. Authorities attempting to implement intrinsically evil laws have no authority to do so. It's as simple as that.
You represent the Catholic Church doctrine as authoritative; I submit to you, however, that the Bible is the ultimate authority.
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” [2 Timothy 3:16-17]
Where man’s law is in conflict with God’s law, God’s law should be obeyed. The Church is composed on Godly men, but men nevertheless. Where the Church’s doctrine is in conflict with Scripture, God’s word should be obeyed. As long as there is no conflict with Scripture, Church doctrine may be followed. Where there is no applicable Scripture or Church doctrine, then a Christian should follow their conscience.
Specifically, the Bible states that homosexuality is a sin; it does not say that issuing a marriage license to homosexuals is a sin. If the law required me to be a homosexual, I would refuse (clear conflict with God’s law). If I were a license clerk and the law required me to issue a marriage license to homosexuals, I would have to resign in protest (matter of conscience).
The Holocaust example puts a very fine point on this issue. Being commanded by superior officers to commit premeditated murder is a direct conflict with God’s law. Truly, your question WWJD is an interesting one. We know that Jesus died on the cross as a sin offering for all of us, so that whoever believes in Him will not die but have life everlasting. I suspect Jesus would have resisted unto death.
On the other hand, what would Jesus have US do? I am not qualified to attempt to answer. I know He would not have us submit; whether to resign, refuse, or obstruct, however, is the hard part. Again, a matter of conscience.
I would like to think I would obstruct at risk of my own death, since there is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for his friends. In truth, I cannot know what I would have done.
Why?
Where's that in the Bible?
Actually, the Gospel of Luke reads more like this.
And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me". Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you." [Luke 22:19-20]
Therefore, we honor Christ’s sacrifice when we eat the bread and drink the cup.
"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector." --Jesus (Matthew 18:17)Because the Church is "the pillar and foudation of truth."
1 Timothy 3:15"if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth."
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” [2 Timothy 3:16-17]
Hey there was no Bible until the Catholic Church 'canonized' it. St Peter did not have the Bible as his authority.
They adopt from Central and South America mainly. And some asian kids too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.